zeldafandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:New Temple of Courage Layout.
Well, I am thinking, should we recreate the Temple of Courage so the layout looks a litte more, ah, Temple-ish? Please see this link. Okay, maybe a vote is in order? UberPhoeb 00:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC) All in favor : : Well, I guess I don't count :P UberPhoeb 00:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : This is most certainly an interesting notion. --Caiaphasthesympathist (talk) 02:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : :I don't see why not. [[User:Baltro|'Baltro']] [ [[User Talk:Baltro|'talk']] ] 02:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : Why not? (That was rhetorical, don't answer that.) --[[User:Moblin slayer|'Moblin']] [[User talk:Moblin slayer|''Slayer]] 16:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : Yeah, I think it would be cool! Admitidly, there will probobly need to be a some fine-tuning for the final product, but I'm all for a "Temple"-ish page. But lets keep the WWF smackdown style of the fights - thats just fun. [Kamari no Hyrule; 03:30, 26 June 2009 (UTC)] : : Yeah, looks pretty cool.Definetly needs more flair though, like you said.Not even sure if I can vote (being a new user and all)but it sounds good!-User:Hylianhero777 : : It would be nice to change that. zeldafreak39 : : Not bad. could be shorter, and needs better pics for some things, but overall eye-catching and good. --DekutullaZM (talk) 20:02, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Even if I can't vote...P.S: MO)RTHS!MORTHSMORTHSMORTHSMORTHS!*Gets carried away in a straight jacket, screaming "Why, Michael Jackson? WHY??"* : : I'm supporting this, even if I don't think it's perfect in its current state, I know we'll get it fixed up before it actually gets put in the ToC. --[[User:Lisa URAQT|'Lisa']] [[User talk:Lisa URAQT|'UR']][[User:Lisa URAQT/Journal|'A']] 01:23, 29 June 2009 (UTC) : : I think this is a wonderfull idea,but it needs an example. --User:Nintendo fan : : lets do it why not im mean it cant be changed that much right??--User:Keatonew 00:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC) : : A face-lift would be nice. ----SageofWater (talk) 02:42, 30 June 2009 (UTC) : : I like the idea. Could use a redesign. Twilightwizard0309 (talk) 18:18, 16 July 2009 (UTC) : : Sure i'll go with it. BetweenBlack&White 11:57, 18 July 2009 (UTC) : : I will support a new Temple design- don't go overboard with the changes, though. Try to keep it simple. Signed, The Recondite Sage : : Sounds Cool. DragonPhoenix13 (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC) : Definitely, The Temple of Courage is way overdue for a makeover Nayru goddess 12:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC) : Seriously, Zeldapedia is sadly a very small wiki compared to others. This will get more people in! Compare us to Zelda wiki, we will do better with this new layout, and even if we don't, what difference will it make? --Zelda311 Golden Fierce Deity 22:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC) : Lol I think that a new look would be great, why not. I have seen the Temple evolve since week one and a new look would be sweet. User:Gdmproductions13 All who oppose : : I DRTJR the great like the current system of THE TEMPLE OF COURAGE DRTJRDRTJR (talk) 01:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : give me an example and this might become a support. I dub you sir cheesy opener. 'Metroidhunter32' 02:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : We'd have to really do it right or it'll look tacky, so I'm just going to oppose until somebody comes up with a good design, when this will become a support. Unless that happens, this will stay as an oppose. If that thing on your sandbox is the best we've got, I have to oppose. 'Xykeb' 'Yvolix' ''' '' 01:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC) ''Xykeb'' ''Yvolix'' '' '' 05:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : Until you come up with something, no. Even if this wins with supports, it can't change unless there is an option to change to. Nah i don't like it.—Triforce' ' 14' 16:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC) : : I need to see an example before I will change my vote. Sorry, but that's not too good.(Darknut15 (talk) 20:51, 25 June 2009 (UTC)) : Interesting and kind of cool, but all it does is just require more scrolling to get down to the fight, making it fairly pointless. Also it may lag up things as well after a few weeks of fighting. so...sorry, but I am going to have to decline. Dialask77 Ice Wizard 15:34, 26 June 2009 (UTC) : : It looks terible, this is my turf, and I say we forget all about this. So, just plain 'NO. Sincerely, Watcher. : : I say no. Mr kmil : : In the words of Jay Sherman, renowned film critic turned mental case, "'''it stinks". Constructive criticism, that you'll get from those who were fortunate enough in life to have a freakin' computer and mp3 player that works. --AuronKaizer ' 16:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC) : :Change is good. But seriously, if done right, this could be REALLY cool. My faith in this has dwindled. I get that the sandbox deal is a rough draft only, but I need to see a good final version to give a support vote. Otherwise, I will move this to the oppose column. Moved. I apologize for the apparent fickleness. Jedi Master Link : : I agree with Dialask, more scrolling is a bad thing. I say no. Turtleman579 : : My computer shuts down if I try to load a page with too much memmory and it already has trouble loading the ToC without this, sorry but no. Midna Rocks : : Nope I think it's fine. 'PeakProvince : : The current layout is perfect for voting, which is what ToC is all about. Any other design would ruin that. User:Redeadhunter : : I still like the old one. : : More scrolling=Evil. For those of us on dial-up, too many pictures are bad, and I don't think that there's anything wrong with the current version. ~Bodici22 : : Like others in this column, I'm opposing unless you can show an example that kicks the current design's derriere. I think the one we have is fine the way it is. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. User3000 : : Can't see why it needs a change. TKOTL : : its good as it is. Oni Link 20:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC) : : I've sat on this for long enough. This is a bad idea.'-- C2' / 15:02, October 27, 2009 (UTC) Comments/Concerns Could you give us a idea of what it would look like in a sandbox? Metroidhunter32 00:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC) I dunno, I just don't see a problem with the way it is—'Triforce' 14 01:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC) I agree with Metroid, I'd like to see it in a sandbox. [[User:Lisa URAQT|'Lisa']] [[User talk:Lisa URAQT|'UR']][[User:Lisa URAQT/Journal|'A']] 01:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC) Yeah, it should be really worth finding out whether or not we should vote for something if we don't know if the new layout will be better or worse. --Flashpenny (talk) 01:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC) Well, everyone has pretty much said it, and I'd like to see the new as well before I pass any judgement. Portal-Kombat*Sysop* I refuse to take either side in this until I see a possible sample. Besides, what is wrong with the way it is now? Dialask77 Ice Wizard 04:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC) It seems fine in its current state, but a sample of what it would look like redesigned is in order.(Darknut15 (talk) 04:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)) Sandbox example, then I vote. --'Bek' (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC) I would just like to say, metroid: please read the ToC talk page. UberPhoeb 17:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC) :Wait, so the only change you want to make is to put in a "temple-like" opening paragraph? I thought you meant a whole new look and stuff. Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 21:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC) same as every one else. lets see a sand box. Oni Link 22:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC) OKAY I HAVE THE SANDBOX... IT WAS REALLY SHORT, BUT IT MIGHT CHANGE SOME VOTES (I see some people hate it). UNDERSTAND IT WAS DONE BY PEOPLE WITH LITTLE TO NO FORMATTING KNOWLEDGE, WHILE MOURNING THE LOSS OF A GREAT MUSIC GENIUS (please see this) AND IS NOT THE BEST WE GOT. FEEL FREE TO CHANGE IT IF YOU WOULD LIKE THOUGH. HERE IT IS SORRY FOR THE CAPS!!! UberPhoeb 03:39, 26 June 2009 (UTC) EveryDayJoe45, does your crossed-out comment mean that you no longer oppose? And if so, why is your vote not in the supporting area? Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 18:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC) I'm changing to neutral on the issue. So i'm not supporting or opposing. But I just deleted my vote, to limit confusion. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 18:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC) Made a few changes, and I think it looks better than it did. What do y'all think?--'Bek' (talk) 18:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC) Wow, drama. 03:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)MaloMart (talk) It's solved. Truthfully this has nothing to do with this.—'Triforce' 14 03:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC) I don't like the way things are looking. With so many supports and so many opposes, I can just tell that there's going to be an upset on the losing side no matter what happens. Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 07:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC) How do you add backgrounds? Maybe we can add a Temple-ish background behind it, and some great textures for the text and stuff. That will be GREAT!--Shade Link (talk) 11:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC) :I'm not the best html man, but I've never seen a background image. Only transparent images with stuff on top of them. I dunno if I could do that with wikimarkup. UberPhoeb 15:10, 29 June 2009 (UTC) ::I saw one yesterday, asked a dev of the site to tell me how to do it, but he said he didn't know, and the webmaster left. Sadness. UberPhoeb 05:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC) The vote's up to +6 now. Unless 7 opposes come in the next day, I think it's safe to say Zeldapedia wants change. UberPhoeb 05:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC) Okay, it looks like we're supporting this. However...before it's implemented, people want it to look fancier. Could anyone who's REALLY good with wiki markup help? Thanks UberPhoeb 00:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC) So, when is the voting gonna be over and we do whatever with the ToC?--Shade Link (talk) 14:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC) If we changed the layout would we change the archives layout too? That might cause problems, unless someone could show me an example of the new layout and assure me that it wouldn't screw anything up then i'm voting no. PeakProvince No. Archives are meant to let people see how things were not are. Mr kmil okay, the vote has now shifted to oppose, what do we do now?'--C2' 03:05, 1 August 2009 (UTC) How long has it been? When DO we decide what to do? I am not being impatient, I am just wondering if we are actually gonna DO anything about the ToC.--Shade Link (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC) so does anybody even care, anymore? b/c the longer i think about this, the more and more i want to oppose.'--C2' 14:11, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Ok, We should call it a support and change it to the new version.--Shade Link (talk) 14:37, 2 August 2009 (UTC) If we decide to change the ToC... is it going to be the one in UserPhoeb's sandbox? User3000 Not really. You can add your own ideas. But I'm against it either way. Besides, at this point, we should just keep it the same.(Darknut15 (talk) 03:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)) We're at a tie now. Not to sound pushy or rude, but when we'll the voting end?(Darknut15 (talk) 02:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)) The voting ended a LONG time ago. Everybody needs to re log to see the sitenotice. Lol. Okay, since nobody has sumbitted ideas, you have 5 days to make my sandbox look pimp or what is in it at that time will be the new ToC layout UberPhoeb 06:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC) Well as it is, It's a tie so we can't really do anything unless it becomes one-sided again.—'Triforce' 14 14:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC) Sigh....only 5 more days of bliss before the industrial corporation takes over. Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 19:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC) Im as bumed as you are Xykeb. Curse you UberPhoeb for bringing this to everyones attension!!!Midna Rocks :Nothing's changing until it's a clear support. A one-vote lead is hardly a majority. And UP, this is your idea, It's your responsibility to make it look better, not ours.—'Triforce' 14 03:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC) ::I had ended the voting at a +7 vote count, I had seen a for sure sign of yes, I clearly said voting has ended, then more people came, and broke the rules. After I edited the sitenotice, people started voting. UberPhoeb 16:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC) :::You can't end the voting and then let it sit there just because there is a lot of support. People are going to change their minds, and more people are going to notice this and want to vote. Besides, I don't think it's fair to have us vote at all when we don't even have a set new design. User3000 She has a very good point. This should not have been enacted without a design to replace the old one. Perhaps it would be best to just end this and leave things the way they are now.(Darknut15 (talk) 20:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)) dude, the idea is right Here. I have my own designs for it, but someone might kill me for it XD My designs are right here(There is a slight black background and red text). Eh, whatever, I will just add it to the sandbox. The Admins can take it off it that is not where it should be.--Shade Link (talk) 20:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC) I'm aware of that. I worded it incorrectly. The design UP came up with has not appealed to the majority of users. Also, it does look better with the refinments you made.(Darknut15 (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)) Like Darknut said, UP's design hasn't really been received well, and she posted it as a suggestion, not the definite new design. IMHO, if you guys are really pushing for the new design, then I think all the schmancy intro stuff should get tossed out the window, but the new logo with the Hylian and everything is really cool. If you guys are going to change, then put in that logo. Except maybe you might want to fix the fire (if that's what the orange blobs are). User3000 UP is actually a guy. ;)(Darknut15 (talk) 20:54, 18 August 2009 (UTC)) :Oops. Sorry, UP! User3000 hahahah, jjust maybe if you looked before. '--C2' 22:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC) It's too bad Flashpenny and Big Poe=Nice Guy turned out to be the same person. Otherwise we'd have two extra oppose votes... Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 17:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC) haha, it would simplify things, quite a bit actually.'--C2' 19:24, 20 August 2009 (UTC) whats the whole story on that? i all happened while i was gone what did he say or how did we find out? Oni Link 20:51, 20 August 2009 (UTC) :Well, Flashpenny spammed a bunch of pages with a made-up (aka fake) character (I can't remember what the name of the character was). He was blocked for doing this repeatedly. He worked his way around this block by making a new account, Big Poe=Nice Guy. When Flashpenny's block was over, he then had two accounts with which he could perform sock puppetry, voting twice for certain things and such. EveryDayJoe45 got a bit suspicious, since they have nearly identical theories, personalities, outlooks, etc. Flashpenny/Big Poe=Nice Guy's excuse was that they were really good friends. UberPhoeb eventually found out they were operating under the same IP, and of course it doesn't make sense for one friend to only edit while at the other's house. He tried to worm his way out by feigning confusion at the identical IP addresses, but eventually found himself trapped in a corner and admitted to it. Both accounts were then blocked permanently. Xykeb Yvolix '' '' 20:57, 20 August 2009 (UTC) That is true MH, but since he performed Sockpuppetry and tried to lie and "prove" that he wasn't doing so, he got perma banned. Sockpuppeting and directly lying about it and trying to make it look like you are not lying=Perma Ban.--Shade Link (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2009 (UTC) Hey guys, didn't an admin say that in 5 days from when he said it we are making our judgement? Well it has been at least a week since he said that. There are either 13 or 14 opposes(ones that aren't crossed out), 21 supports(none crossed out).--Shade Link (talk) 19:20, 22 August 2009 (UTC) And sorry for a late reply to whoever talked about my edit to the New ToC(background and text changed), but it will look pretty cool if this makes it through.--Shade Link (talk) 19:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC) I'm all for us never reaching an agreement (and I mean that) but how many votes is sustancial? Midna Rocks